Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of pain after prophylactic anticoagulant injections to prevent venous thromboembolism.
Shyu, Margaret; Robinson, Tyler P; Morgan, Allison M; Johnson, Julie K; Shan, Ying; Bilimoria, Karl Y; Yang, Anthony D.
Afiliación
  • Shyu M; Department of Internal Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States of America.
  • Robinson TP; Surgical Outcomes and Quality Improvement Center(SOQIC), Department of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States of America.
  • Morgan AM; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, United States of America.
  • Johnson JK; Northwestern Quality Improvement, Research, & Education in Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States of America.
  • Shan Y; Northwestern Quality Improvement, Research, & Education in Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States of America.
  • Bilimoria KY; Surgical Outcomes and Quality Improvement Center(SOQIC), Department of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States of America.
  • Yang AD; Surgical Outcomes and Quality Improvement Center(SOQIC), Department of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States of America.
Surg Open Sci ; 20: 98-100, 2024 Aug.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39006205
ABSTRACT
Subcutaneous injection of unfractionated heparin (UH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is frequently utilized for venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis. We previously discovered that nurses believe patients experience more pain with UH compared to the LMWH enoxaparin; however, no published studies that are appropriately powered exist comparing pain associated with subcutaneous chemoprophylaxis. Our objective was to assess if differences exist in pain associated with subcutaneous administration of UH and enoxaparin. We conducted an observational study of patients who underwent major abdominal surgery between 11/2017-4/2019. All patients received one of three prophylactic regimens (1) UH only, (2) Initial dose of UH followed by enoxaparin, or (3) enoxaparin only. Of the 74 patients observed, 40 patients received UH followed by enoxaparin, 17 received UH only, and 17 received enoxaparin only. There was a significant difference in patients' mean perceived pain between subcutaneous UH and enoxaparin injections (mean post-injection pain after UH 3.3 vs. enoxaparin 1.5; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in perceived pain for patients who received consecutive UH or enoxaparin injections. Differences in pain associated with different chemoprophylaxis agents may be an unrecognized driver of patient refusals of VTE chemoprophylaxis and may lead to worse VTE outcomes.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Surg Open Sci Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Surg Open Sci Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos
...